Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kotzian v. Barr

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided November 15, 1979Published

1DissentPashman, J.

I dissent substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Pressler writing for a unanimous Appellate Division. Kotzian v. Barr, 152 N.J.Super. 561 (App.Div.1977). I also wish to address directly what I consider to be the flaws in the Court’s analysis.

The majority agrees with the Appellate Division that the policies of complete compensation and encouragement of settlements should govern the decision to suspend prejudgment interest. See ante at 363-364; ; 152 N.J.Super. at 566; see also Busik v. Levine, 63 N.J. 351, 358-360 (1973), app. dism., 414 U.S. 1106, 94 S.Ct. 831, 38 L.Ed.2d 733…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Busik v. LevineSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1973
  2. Saffore v. Atlantic Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1956
  3. Motor Club Fire & Casualty Co. v. New Jersey Manufacturers InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1977
  4. Battle v. General Cellulose Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1957
  5. Kotzian v. BarrNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API